As an untrustworthy American, I say de-escalation is having NK stop threatening the US mainland. That kind of talk is bad joo joo for everybody. Trust me. — frank

And just when has that de-escalation really happened? When the media isn't telling about a possible conflict, but is hopeful? That's the "de-escalation"? I agree here with Sophisticat.

North Korea has it's nuclear program. North Korea is building nuclear weapons. The hem and haw of the political discourse between the countries is absolutely nothing new. Nothing new. And this time there isn't even anything on the the table ...other that the two leaders will possibly meet.

The fact is that likely there will be those few missiles that will threaten US mainland. If they don't already exist. The media is quite mute about it, but when you read the interviews of the US generals and admirals responsible of the Korean theatre, their message is pretty bleak.

We can hope for a breakthrough, but that is unlikely. I'd figure this is just the ordinary we have seen in the Korean peninsula: sometimes there is hope in the air, officials meet, something is discussed ...until tensions rise again from a missile test or some B-2 flying over South Korea.

In reality, different cultures have very different structures of beliefs, so if we base our judgements of what others need, on our own beliefs, we're bound to get some things wrong. — Metaphysician Undercover

That bridge between cultures is something we have yet to achieve anywhere in the world. Yet it likely exists as it's own thread between the two societies, families separated and made between citizens of both nations, sharing a similar heritage and with that common traditions.

Ungratefulness is hard to swallow, but for anyone intent on helping others, it has to be an expectation. — Metaphysician Undercover

I absolutely agree with you which is why I try really hard not to impose my expectations on anyone but me. My ability to back up that non imposition of expectations of my children was tested and after listening to them, would never have made a wit bit of difference on their opinions even if I had tried.

I asked them (21yrs old and 18yrs old) if they would support the reimplantation of the draft if necessary. After a bunch of defining who, what, where and why it came down to one simple factor. They would agree with the draft but those drafted would only serve on our shores. The future generation is not buying into nation building or arms races. It is about self preservation through a mutli layer system of defenses.

I asked them (21yrs old and 18yrs old) if they would support the reimplantation of the draft if necessary. After a bunch of defining who, what, where and why it came down to one simple factor. They would agree with the draft but those drafted would only serve on our shores. The future generation is not buying into nation building or arms races. It is about self preservation through a mutli layer system of defenses. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

There is a very real need for serving in your own land, as we need a rapid response to natural disasters, terrorism, and other possible problems which sometimes require large resources of human commitment. In the area where I live, some of the high school jurisdictions have adopted a program whereby students are required to submit a specified number of volunteer hours in order to graduate. This type of necessary volunteerism, in which one is required to volunteer, but may choose the type of work volunteered for, could produce an army of forced volunteers, and this may make a good replacement for the old draft system. It would be a shift away from the focus on foreign to service, toward more community service at home, though the option of foreign service would still be available to those who choose it.

Have simply a peace agreement. One should remember that there is only an armstice between the countries.

Have both South and North Korea reduce there conventional armed forces dramatically, North Korea to give up it's nuclear weapons and simply have the US make a gradual withdrawal from South Korea. Okinawa and the bases in Japan are quite close By still to defend South Korea.

Especially a Republican administration, at least in theory, could make such a move if it could (again in theory) contain it's own hawks. Democrats simply couldn't be against a peace deal.

Unfortunately this actually goes too close to the North Korean view and Trump already has dismissed it. And the totally inept Trump has already the neocons in charge of foreign policy, so that's that.

In the area where I live, some of the high school jurisdictions have adopted a program whereby students are required to submit a specified number of volunteer hours in order to graduate. This type of necessary volunteerism, in which one is required to volunteer, but may choose the type of work volunteered for, could produce an army of forced volunteers, and this may make a good replacement for the old draft system. It would be a shift away from the focus on foreign to service, toward more community service at home, though the option of foreign service would still be available to those who choose it. — Metaphysician Undercover

This is an impressive idea and one that would seem to work for everyone. I am not sure where our dedication to civil service was lost but your idea is a great way to redefine what it means to be part of a community. Participation in the success of that community instead of leaving it for someone else to worry about. There is a community program out here that I wanted to become a representative for called CERT a community emergency response team and was ready to enroll only to have the idea put in my head that as CERT rep, I could be asked to collect fellow citizens firearms, under circumstances we do not yet know and that I could not do. So I decided not to enroll though I am not sure that would be the same conclusion if I entertained the idea again.

Now there's an oxymoron if ever I saw one. Anyway, I find it disgusting that a discussion about a peace prize is being used to put forward views in favour of the draft. Because nothing says "peace" more than being forced into war.

It takes some nerve to roll your eyes and suggest that it's inappropriate to bring up what Trump has done in relation to gun control here when you've brought up irrelevant anecdotes and expressed at much greater length than the brevity that Banno is known for, yet again, your idolisation of soldiers, as if that's what this discussion is all about.